User talk:Vince005

Hi Vince. Have ideas for a topic yet? JLapka (talk) 19:00, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

Welcome
Hi Vince005, Derrick Coetzee has asked me to be your mentor for your Environmental Policy class, and I'm glad to accept his offer. I'm not entirely sure what I need to do, but I'll keep an eye over your edits and you can click here to leave me a message, if you have any questions while you're editing. I noticed ↑ that you need to pick a topic - feel free to drop me a note if you want a 2nd opinion on whether the subject is likely to lead to a decent article. I'll drop a template below that should contain links to pretty much everything you could ever need in terms of our complicated policies and guidelines, but at the moment, the most important thing is to BE BOLD!. Happy editing. SmartSE (talk) 22:55, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

Me again
Hi Vince, I replied again on my talk page. As I said there I'm a bit busy, so can you email me (Special:EmailUser/Smartse) if you'd like me to take a look at your draft? I'll try to attend to it as soon as I can. Thanks SmartSE (talk) 09:03, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

Hey Smartse, I posted my draft on my sandbox (I still have to do minor changes on the content). If you have time could you please take a look at it? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Vince005/Sandbox Vince005 (talk) 07:25, 23 March 2011 (UTC)


 * Hi Vince, sorry for the slow response, if you had emailed me I could have got onto it sooner. Firstly, a big problem that needs fixing is that a lot of the content is apparently unreferenced and it is unclear where you've got the information from - can you add more citations to make this clearer? I also noticed that some of the content appears to be copied and pasted from elsewhere, for example "General acute care hospitals, acute psychiatric hospitals, skilled nursing and/or intermediate care facilities," (and I assume the rest of the section too). If they are federal govt publications you can technically do this, but if they are state publications then it is a copyright violation and must be removed. It is always best to rewrite things in your own words even if a source is in the publc domain. I also find the "Environmental problems and causes" rather too essay like. Sentences like "With populations continuing to rise, using water wisely helps save this vital resource for future generations" are not particularly neutral sounding and without a source, it looks like original research. I know that what you've written is true, but I think you need to try and explain what the code mandates building contractors to do and then maybe explain why those actions are necessary, but only if you can find sources which already link the problems and the code together. Later on you should read WP:LEAD and then get rid of the "Definition" title as well. Sorry if I've come across as overly negative, I'm sure it can be improved substantially without too much work. Please send me an email when you want me to have another look. Thanks SmartSE (talk) 09:22, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

Copyright problem: 2010 California Green Building Standards Code
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! We welcome and appreciate your contributions, such as 2010 California Green Building Standards Code, but we regretfully cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from either web sites or printed material. This article appears to contain material copied from various different online sources, and therefore to constitute a violation of Wikipedia's copyright policies. The copyrighted text has been or will soon be deleted. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with our copyright policy. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators are liable to be blocked from editing.

If you believe that the article is not a copyright violation, or if you have permission from the copyright holder to release the content freely under license allowed by Wikipedia, then you should do one of the following:


 * If you have permission from the author to release the text under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License (CC-BY-SA), leave a message explaining the details at Talk:2010 California Green Building Standards Code and send an email with confirmation of permission to "permissions-en (at) wikimedia (dot) org". Make sure you quote the exact page name, 2010 California Green Building Standards Code, in your email. See Requesting copyright permission for instructions.
 * If a note on the original website states that re-use is permitted "under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License (CC-BY-SA), version 3.0, or that the material is released into the public domain leave a note at Talk:2010 California Green Building Standards Code with a link to where we can find that note.
 * If you own the copyright to the material: send an e-mail from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en(at)wikimedia(dot)org or a postal message to the Wikimedia Foundation permitting re-use under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License and GNU Free Documentation License, and note that you have done so on Talk:2010 California Green Building Standards Code. See Donating copyrighted materials for instructions.

It may also be necessary for the text be modified to have an encyclopedic tone and to follow Wikipedia article layout. For more information on Wikipedia's policies, see Wikipedia's policies and guidelines.

If you would like to begin working on a new version of the article you may do so at [ this temporary page]. Leave a note at Talk:2010 California Green Building Standards Code saying you have done so and an administrator will move the new article into place once the issue is resolved. Thank you, and please feel welcome to continue contributing to Wikipedia. Happy editing! OCNative (talk) 03:53, 13 May 2011 (UTC)

A word about close paraphrasing
Hi. I appreciate your working on these issues, but I'm afraid that some of the content you propose remains unusable on Wikipedia.

The source says:
 * Early in 2010, California’s Building Standards Commission (CBSC) and the Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) finalized the first statewide mandatory green building code in the country for newly constructed buildings: Title 24 Part 11 of the California Building Standards Code (commonly called “CALGreen”).

The proposed rewrite says:
 * Early in 2010, California Building Standards Commission (CBSC) and the Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) finalized the first statewide mandatory green building code in the country for newly constructed buildings: Title 24 Part 11 of the California Building Standards Code.

The same source says:
 * CALGreen complements—but does not replace—established third-party rating systems.

The proposed rewrite says:
 * Calgeen complements, but it doesn’t replace, established third-party rating systems

The same source says:
 * In addition to the mandatory measures in CALGreen, the code also includes two voluntary packages of above-minimum green practices, called “Tiers.” The Tiers include all the mandatory CALGreen measures plus additional required practices (prerequisites), with a further requirement to choose a set number of optional measures from lists.

The proposed rewrite says:
 * In addition to the mandatory measures in Calgreen, the code also includes two voluntary measures, called “Tiers”, intended to further encourage green building practices. The Tiers include all the mandatory Calgreen measures plus additional required practices (prerequisites)

While facts are not copyrightable, creative elements of presentation - including both structure and language - are. Wikipedia's copyright policies require that the content we take from non-free sources, aside from brief and clearly marked quotations, be rewritten from scratch. This helps us to avoid creating derivative works. I'm afraid that minimal alterations of the sort above do not clear us of copyright concerns. The essay Close paraphrasing contains some suggestions for rewriting that may help avoid these issues. The article Wikipedia Signpost/2009-04-13/Dispatches, while about plagiarism rather than copyright concerns, also contains some suggestions for reusing material from sources that may be helpful, beginning under "Avoiding plagiarism".

Alternatively, if the material can be verified to be compatibly licensed or public domain or if permission is provided, we can use the original text with proper attribution. (See Plagiarism.)

I am not quite finished reviewing the rewrite. I will remove what we cannot salvage. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 17:20, 22 May 2011 (UTC)